Preservatives in Eye Drops

Barkman, R; Germanis, Mirdza; Karpe, G.; Malmborg, Anna‐Stina

doi:10.1111/j.1755-3768.1969.tb08132.x

Cited by 19 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By dripping out fluid only 12 of the 638 multidose bottles in the present study (1.9%) yielded bacterial growth considered to be clinically and microbiologically significant. This result does not differ very much from those reported by Barkman et al (1969);Hugo & Wilson (1970) ;Norn 8c Fr@lund Thomsen (1967) andAslund et al (1978), while among others Harte et al (1978) have reported a much higher frequency of growth.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

“…Thus bacterial growth from eye drop containers and the occurrence of serious ocular infections following the use of contaminated solutions have been reported by among others Allen & Mangiaracine (1964), Ayliffe et al (1966), Harte et al (1978), McCulloch (1943), Schmelzer Hervding Contamination of in-use eye drops (1965) and Vaughn (1955). On the other hand, some studies show only a negligible incidence of bacterial growth (Barkman et al 1969;Hugo & Wilson 1970;h u n d et al 1978). Whether or not prolonged use of adequately preserved eye drops implies an increased risk of ocular infection is still open to question.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bacterial Contamination of Drops and Dropper Tips of In‐use Multidose Eye Drop Bottles

Høvding

Sjursen

1982

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The type and frequency of bacterial contamination of 638 in-use multidose eye drop bottles are reported. By dripping, bacteria were recovered from 82 bottles (12.9%). Bacterial growth considered to be clinically and microbiologically significant were found in 12 cases (1.9%). The swabbings from 38 of 180 dropper tips (2 1.1 %) yielded bacteria, while none of the pipette aspirates from 196 bottles were positive. The flora obtained by dripping and swabbing was very similar to the normal conjunctival and skin flora. It is suggested that microorganisms isolated by dripping often originate from contaminated dropper tips. The frequency of contaminated drops did not increase with increasing duration of use of the bottles. Repeated examinations and inoculation studies indicated that the solutions were self-sterilizing. This indicates that multidose eye drop bottles preserved and dispensed as in the present study may be used for more than the usual 4 weeks without increasing the risk of ocular infection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Bacterial Contamination of Drops and Dropper Tips of In‐use Multidose Eye Drop Bottles

Høvding

Sjursen

1982

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All of the solutions cultured in this study came from multi-dose squeeze-type bottles. Development of the squeeze-type dropper bottle rather than a corked bottle with a separate pipette was intended to reduce the risk of solution contamination because it allowed delivery of the medication without opening the bottle 15. Other investigators have suggested that pipette-type dispensers decrease the rate of contamination 18…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial contamination of ophthalmic solutions used in an extended care facility

Jokl

Wormser

Nichols

et al. 2007

British Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

8% of ophthalmic solutions used in a long-term care facility were contaminated with bacteria, most frequently Proteus mirabilis. Compared with solutions not containing steroids, steroid solutions were 5.8 times more likely to be contaminated (RR = 5.84, 95% CI: 2.42 to 14.10, p<0.002). The frequent contamination during reuse of certain steroid-containing ophthalmic solutions raises the question of whether single-use solutions might be preferred for these and other classes of ocular drugs.

show abstract

“…Historically, eye drops in the early 20th century were stored in corked glass bottles and administered with a pipette, which, unsurprisingly, were noted to be contaminated over 90% of the time. 3 Not only was BAK one of the first preservatives to be added to eye drops (first cited in the 1940s), early studies showed that BAK has a better antimicrobial profile than other ocular preservatives of the time such as chlorobutanol, thimerosal, methylparaben/propylparaben, phenylmercuric nitrate, phenyl-ethyl alcohol, and polymyxin B sulfate. 4 Indeed, BAK continues to be the most commonly used preservative in glaucoma medications to this day.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%